ArticleCurrent microbiology2014
In vitro activity of new cephalosporins vs Streptococcus pneumoniae from the Canadian Bacterial Surveillance Network: 2008-2011.
Article in Current microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pharmacotherapy of Lower Respiratory Tract Infections in Elderly-Focused on Antibiotics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Between 2008 and 2011, 6,895 Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates were submitted to the Canadian Bacterial Surveillance Network and underwent in vitro susceptibility testing. Fifteen percent of S. pneumoniae isolates were collected from pediatric patients (0-15 years old), 48.6 % of isolates were collected from adults between 16 and 64 years of age, and 36.1 % from adults aged ≥65 years; age data were not available for 11 patients. Forty-five percent of S. pneumoniae isolates were recovered from sterile specimens, and 55 % of isolates were from nonsterile specimens. Overall, 0.4 % of isolates were resistant to penicillin, 0.4 % to ceftriaxone, 3 % to amoxicillin, 25 % to erythromycin, and 13 % to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; 6.6 % of isolates were multidrug resistant (MDR). Among MDR isolates, resistance rates exceeded 95 % for erythromycin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. The MIC90 of cethromycin, ceftaroline, and ceftobiprole against MDR isolates were 0.12, 0.25, and 1 mg/L, respectively. Ceftaroline, the active form of the prodrug ceftaroline fosamil, exhibited potent in vitro activity against the tested S. pneumoniae including all 456 multidrug-resistant strains. No ceftaroline-resistant isolates were identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.